cationsite

POSTERPRESENTATIONOpenAccessP01.
48.
Biomechanicalresponsestothemechanicalcharacteristicsofaspinalmanipulation:effectofvaryingsegmentalcontactsiteTEdgecombe1*,GKawchuk1,CLong2,JPickar2FromInternationalResearchCongressonIntegrativeMedicineandHealth2012Portland,Oregon,USA.
15-18May2012PurposeSpinalmanipulativetherapy(SMT)isacommoninter-ventionusedtotreatlow-backpain.
Somepriorinvesti-gationsreportdecreasedspinalstiffnessfollowingSMT;othersreportnoeffect.
Giventhattheefficacyofmanytherapies(e.
g.
pharmaceuticals,injections)dependonchoiceofapplicationsiteandoutcomemetric(e.
g.
fast-ingvsnon-fastingbloodsugar),potentialexplanationsformixedSMTresultsincludevariabilityinSMTappli-cationsiteandthemethodofcomputingstiffness.
Basedontheseconsiderations,ourgoalwastodeterminetheinfluenceofSMTapplicationsiteandstiffnesscomputa-tiononSMT-inducedchangesinspinalstiffness.
MethodsInananesthetizedcatpreparation(n=8),simulatedSMTwasdeliveredbyavalidatedmechanicalapparatustotheintactlumbarspineat4sites:L6spinousprocess,leftL6lamina,leftL6mammillaryprocess,andL7spi-nousprocess.
Toobtainstiffnessdata,theapparatusslowlydisplacedtheL6spinousprocessto16N;forceanddisplacementwererecordedcontinuously.
Threemetricswerecalculatedfromtheresultingforce-displa-cementcurve:TerminalInstantaneousStiffness(TIS,stiffnessattheendpointofthecurve),k(averagestiff-ness),andRegionalStiffness(RS,averagestiffnessineach10%intervalofthecurve).
SMT-inducedchangesineachmetricweredeterminedforeachapplicationsiteusinganANOVAmodelcontrollingforSMTpresenta-tionorder.
ResultsSMTappliedattheL6spinousdecreasedTIS(-0.
48N/mm[-0.
86,-0.
09]upper,lower95%CI).
SMTappliedattheL6laminaalsodecreasedTIS(-0.
44N/mm;[-0.
82,-0.
05]).
SMTappliedtotheL6spinousincreasedk(0.
44N/mm,[-0.
01,088]).
SMTappliedatL6spinousprocessandL6laminadecreasedRSduringsome,butnotallintervals.
ConclusionTheseresultssuggestthatpreviousreportsonSMT'seffectonspinalstiffnessmaybeinfluencedbythechoiceofSMTapplicationsiteandstiffnessmetric.
Authordetails1UniversityofAlberta,Edmonton,Canada.
2PalmerCenterforChiropracticResearch,Davenport,USA.
Published:12June2012doi:10.
1186/1472-6882-12-S1-P48Citethisarticleas:Edgecombeetal.
:P01.
48.
Biomechanicalresponsestothemechanicalcharacteristicsofaspinalmanipulation:effectofvaryingsegmentalcontactsite.
BMCComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine201212(Suppl1):P48.
1UniversityofAlberta,Edmonton,CanadaFulllistofauthorinformationisavailableattheendofthearticleEdgecombeetal.
BMCComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine2012,12(Suppl1):P48http://www.
biomedcentral.
com/1472-6882/12/S1/P482012Edgecombeetal;licenseeBioMedCentralLtd.
ThisisanOpenAccessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/2.
0),whichpermitsunrestricteduse,distribution,andreproductioninanymedium,providedtheoriginalworkisproperlycited.